Instruction and Student Learning Issues - Research Paper Example

?Instruction and Learning Introduction A school is established as an educational expected to provide high quality instruction andpromote student learning. It takes great effort to achieve such goals. This essay discusses some important details that school leaders like principals should know and some recommendations on what they can do to uphold the high quality of education they are expected to deliver. Upgrading the Educational System Education is a dynamic discipline that keeps evolving in meeting the needs of learners. As school leaders, principals should be vigilant in keeping up with new trends but at the same time, discerning of which ones to adopt in their schools. One essential element that needs to be carefully monitored is the curriculum and instruction of the school. It is evident that any curriculum definition one way or another puts emphasis on the learning process, gained knowledge and skills, subject content and students’ comprehensive learning experience. In designing an appropriate course curriculum, an essential process needs to be considered including which curriculum model is most suitable for the needs of the learner. The process of learning is as important as the content learned (Newby 2005). One of the most traditional and most commonly used models is “content or syllabus-based”. Blenkin et al (1992) suggest that curriculum is delineated into subjects and delivered through a bulk of knowledge-content. Education, he states, is the route where these can be transferred to students using efficient teaching and learning methods. This type of curriculum emphasizes students attending schools to learn subject-specific facts. It also helps to use this model in assessment process where students, according to their gained qualification can be grouped in to high and low achievers. Schools at present may have similar goals of optimizing students’ learning and maximizing their potentials but may have differing philosophies, approaches and educational strategies in fulfilling these goals. “Predictably, the traditional teacher-centered model in which knowledge is “transmitted” from teacher to learner is rapidly being replaced by alternative models of instruction (e.g., learner-centered, constructivist, and sociocultural ideas) in which the emphasis is on guiding and supporting students as they learn to construct their understanding of the culture and communities of which they are a part (Brown et al., 1993; Duffy & Cunningham, 1996; Pea, 1993). In the process of shifting our attention to the constructive activity of the learner, we recognize the need to anchor learning in real-world or authentic contexts that make learning meaningful and purposeful. “ (Bonk & Cunningham, 1998, p.27) Constructivist theory is gaining more attention, recognition and acceptance in many educational institutions. It premises on the belief that learners “construct” their own learning, and in effect, have better retention of it. In the Constructivist theory the emphasis is placed on the learner or the student rather than the teacher or the instructor.  It is the learner who interacts with objects and events and thereby gains an understanding of the features held by such objects or events.  The learner, therefore, constructs his/her own conceptualizations and solutions to problems.  Learner autonomy and initiative is accepted and encouraged (Van Ryneveld, n.d., n.p.). Teachers come up with several strategies in capturing their students’ attention, and courses are offered in helping educators become more efficient in imparting knowledge and skills to their pupils. No longer do they limit their teaching strategies to boring lectures, dizzying written and oral examinations and students’ delivery of memorized answers to expected questions. Teaching aids have likewise expanded from using flashcards, blackboard demonstrations and textbooks to more concrete materials like actual 3-dimensional objects, dioramas and multimedia materials. Activities are likewise evolving to be more learner-centered, as teachers are coming to terms that their students have a hand in directing their own learning. This is not to say that teachers are slowly losing their hold on the learning of their students. In fact, they are important figures in stimulating and encouraging their students’ pursuit of knowledge. In the practice of Constructivist Education, teachers need to be vigilant in guiding their students’ learning paths. They need to create opportunities for their students to exercise the construction of their own learning. This gives the students more power in the acquisition of learning. Using prior knowledge, they are encouraged to invent their own solutions and try out their own ideas and hypotheses with the able support of their teachers. This way, they can indulge in concrete experiences that focus on their interests. The process of searching for information, analysing data and reaching conclusions is considered more important than learning facts. On the other hand, teachers in the Constructivist tradition should be ready for more challenging roles as mentors and facilitators of learning. No longer are they “dispensers of knowledge” and their students their “blank slates” to write on. “Supplying students with answers is not the goal in a constructivist program; in fact, unanswered questions are important in terms of continued interest and continued learning.” (Brewer, 2001, p.59) Teachers are life-long learners themselves and should accept the challenge of furthering their knowledge if not a step ahead of their students, then at least, in step with them. The effective teacher can discern which learning strategy would be most appropriate on a case-to-case basis. Imbedded in her are hidden agendas for making her students reach their optimum learning potentials and in effect, the development of a healthy self-esteem. She is aware that she is just an instrument in assisting the students to gain knowledge, and not the source of knowledge herself. Educating Diverse Learners Teacher awareness of each student’s learning styles in the classroom makes it easier to think of effective instructional strategies that will make an impact on students (Saravia-Shore, 2008). Understanding learners as unique individuals with different learning styles and intelligences requires many considerations (Lynch-Davis & Goodson-Espy, 2007). At the forefront is the teacher’s ability to understand each student’s learning style in the classroom. The teacher must consider each student’s strengths as well as weaknesses. Therefore, constructing a learner’s profile must be done first with the help of the student (Silver, Strong, & Perini, 2000). Learner diversity is becoming predominant in schools, as embracing diversity and inclusion is encouraged (Saravia-Shore, 2008). With the Multiple Intelligence theory proposed by Gardner (1983) theory, students fall into eight categories of intelligence, or possess a combination of multiple intelligences, known as sub-intelligences. Teachers, who explore this theory and observe and document these intelligences in their students, can create a curriculum that meets the diverse learning styles and strengths of all students in the classroom. In addition, a teacher can pair a student with a certain intelligence strength with another student who holds a corresponding intelligence weakness, and have them work together to improve their skills. This will encourage and motivate students to work in collaboration and foster an understanding that all individuals have intelligences and personal strengths (Gardner, 2006). Teachers should study individual interests and abilities of their students as well as their current knowledge and skills so they can design customized learning activities and select appropriate materials for them (Ellis et al, 2007; Pettig, 2000). Not only will the students learn concepts and skills which are suitable to their abilities but they are can also tap into their prior knowledge, interests and preferred learning styles (Brimijoin, 2005; McTighe & Brown, 2005). That is why students should be provided with lessons and activities that target different abilities and interests. For sure, efforts at such provision will go a long way in meeting the goals of student learning and achievement. Incorporating Technology in Education Modern times has made learning technological skills a must in order to cope with the many advances in technology – the internet, the invention of several helpful software, the invention of a variety of electronic equipment to make education more interesting and vivid to learners. Clements (1999) maintains that “Technology can change the way children think, what they learn, and how they interact with peers and adults” (p. 1). He also recommends technology as a tool for improving children's learning through exploration, creative problem solving, and self-guided instruction (Clements & Samara, 2003). Incorporating technology in the curriculum may be exciting for students, although intimidating for some teachers. Brinkerhoff (2006) identified barriers that prevent teachers from using technology in the classroom as resources, institutional and administrative support, training and experience, and attitudinal or personality factors. For some schools, limited resources of efficient and a good number of computers, software, a reliable internet connection and the hiring of a trained personnel to impart knowledge and skills to teachers and students make them unable to implement a good program that incorporates computer technology in their curriculum. Training and experiential factors were mostly dependent on administrative and institutional support. Most barriers were blamed on the teachers’ attitudes and beliefs in the integration of technology in their classrooms and even their own competence in computer and technological skills. That is why it is up to the school leaders to provide the support teachers need through training, provision of equipment and authority to implement a program they may design to suit their own students. On their own, teachers need to equip students with increasingly higher levels of knowledge and skill not only through the provision of a conventional curriculum incorporating ICT, but also help them develop personal qualities such as being autonomous, self-organizing, networking, enterprising, innovative (Hargreaves, 1999), with 'the capability constantly to redefine the necessary skills for a given task, and to access the sources for learning these skills' (Castells, 1998). Teachers themselves need to be transformed from the traditional ways of organizing teaching and learning in school to using more technical skills in more open, user-friendly, peer-controlled, interactive, virtual communities. Teachers need to model flexibility, networking and creativity which are key outcomes for students to survive the next millennium (Hargreaves, 1999). Training of teachers in ICT and staff development is one huge challenge faced by educational leaders. Psychologically, technology can pose problems for staff feeling threatened and insecure of being dispensable, and easily replaced by the new innovation (Jones & O’Shea, 2004). This is mostly appeased by effective training. Human resources strategy and practice is central to the successful staff development. Enhancing traditional teaching and learning and incorporating modern approaches befitting ICT for experienced teachers and recruiting staff with expertise in delivering a high quality teaching and learning environment (Jones & O’Shea, 2004). Empowering School Personnel in Applying Best Practices in Education Being an effective teacher encompasses a wide spectrum of responsibilities – from designing an environment conducive to learning, to planning appropriate lessons for students and implementing them with effective educational strategies to being able to manage the class well and instilling discipline in the students, to involving parents and coordinating with others regarding the provision of quality education for the students. Thus, they need all the support they can get from the school management. There are three domains of teachers’ work and these are professional knowledge, professional practice and professional commitment. Encompassing these domains are elements teachers need to adhere to such as knowledge of subject matter and how to teach it to their students; knowing how their students learn; planning assessing and reporting for effective learning; communicating effectively with their students; managing their classrooms to maintain safe and challenging learning environments; continually improving their professional expertise; and being a contributing member in society as an educator. Being able to balance all these tasks, and being efficient at each one at that can be very challenging (NSW Institute of Teachers, 2004). School management may need to equip them with adequate training by hiring educational experts to hone their skills or to update them with current trends. Another option is to support them in attending outside seminar-workshops or in pursuit of further education. Little (1982) recommends teachers to collaborate with each other to come up with more effective instruction. They should engage in frequent, continuous and increasing concrete and precise conferences on their teaching practice and be able to reflect if these practices are working to encourage success in their students. They should be open to feedback and allow frequent observation of their teaching performance. Together, they should plan, design, research, evaluate and prepare teaching materials. They should also support and coach each other on other practices of teaching. From Theory to Practice John Dewey (1916) believes that quality education stems from how children are trained to think. Dewey claims that learning must be experienced by the learner if it is to be effectively retained. He does not agree with teaching students via lectures about things children have no direct experience with and reliance on mere textbooks. Dewey advocates active learning to stimulate a student’s thinking on his own. Teachers cannot expect to be the main dispensers of knowledge to their students, but should recognize and respect that children are capable of coming up with their own opinions, and conclusions and ideas. Allowing students to explore their own ideas gives them more power in the acquisition of learning. Using information they have previously acquired, they are encouraged to invent their own solutions and try out their own ideas and hypotheses with the able support of their teachers. This way, they can indulge in concrete experiences that focus on their interests. The process of searching for information, analysing data and reaching conclusions is considered more important than learning facts. Although teachers are expected to know what to teach children in general, they also need to be able to adjust to individual needs of their students, as not all students learn the same way at the same pace. Trafton (1975) suggests that individualization must include “acceptance of each child as an acceptance of the child’s ideas, a provision of opportunities for pupil input in developing and selecting learning experiences, a concern for the quality of the child’s intellectual development, and a willingness to take time to know the child as an individual” (p. 39). Maintaining High Quality of Education Research has shown that student learning and performance should be evaluated with authentic assessment. Wiggins’ (1991) description of what authentic assessment should be is that it involves “engaging problems and questions of importance and substance in which students must use knowledge (and construct meaning) effectively and creatively” (p. 39). Case studies of schools that implemented authentic assessment methods highlighted the use of different strategies for customizing instruction, deeply involving students with the subject matter and assessing the assessment support changes in the curriculum, teaching and school organization (Darling-Hammond et al., 1995). Teachers can encourage students to produce more intellectual work in the form of real world applications, and hence increase their performance (Newmann, Secada, and Wehlage, 1995). Performance-based assessments such as science experiments, oral presentations, essays, video documentations of performances, etc. show evidence of students’ use of various strategies to solve problems rather than merely seeing the right answer asked for on a test (Darling-Hammond et al, 1993). Summary Principals carry a heavy burden on their shoulders in the discharge of their duties and responsibilities. Ensuring parents and students that the school they lead upholds high standards of instruction and high expectations of student learning and achievement entails commitment and dedication to their vocation. Thus, they need to adopt best practices and find the most suitable and appropriate approach to carrying out their curriculum. Constructivist approaches that gives licence to students to take a more active part in carving their learning paths is one strong option to take. Not only is it gaining prominence and distinction as an effective and empowering approach, but it is very much developmentally-appropriate as seen from the high respect it has gained from respected educational experts. This approach offers a wide variety of educational strategies to use in the teaching-learning process. Educating students with diverse backgrounds, abilities, needs and potentials is another challenge teachers and school leaders face, as they need to meet individual needs of students in order to optimize their potentials. The use of technology has become a welcome tool in further improving strategies and techniques in education. In order to maintain high quality of education, school personnel led by the principal should all be lifelong learners – eager to keep feeding their unquenchable hunger for knowledge and information to impart to their students. It takes continuous study, research, enrolment in learning programs that help them be updated with the latest educational trends. It also needs constant reflection if what they are doing is right. Teachers ignite the spark of interest and motivation for learning in students. It is their fondest hope that their students will keep the fire burning. References Blenkin, G.M. et al (1992) Change and the Curriculum, London: Paul Chapman. Bonk, C.J. & Cunningham, D.J. (1998) “Searching for Learner-Centered, Constructivist, and Sociocultural Components of Collaborative Educational Learning Tools” in Electronic Collaborators. Retrieved on June 20, 2011 From www.publicationshare.com/docs/Bon02.pdf Brewer, J.A. (2001) Introduction to Early Childhood Education. Boston: Allyn and Bacon Brinkerhoff, J. (2006) Effects of a Long-Duration, Professional Development Academy on Technology Skills, Computer Self-Efficacy, and Technology Integration Beliefs and Practices, International Society for Technology in Education Volume 39 Number 1 Brimijoin, K. (2005). Differentiation and high-stakes testing: An oxymoron? Theory Into Practice, 44(3), 254-261. Brown, A. L., Ash, D., Rutherford, M., Nakagawa, K., Gordon, A., & Campione, J. C. (1993). “Distributed expertise in the classroom.” In G. Salomon (Ed.), Distributed cognitions: Psychological and educational considerations. New York: Cambridge University Press. Castells, M. (1998) End of Millennium. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, Ltd. Clements, D. H. (1999). The effective use of computers with young children. In Juanita V. Copley (Ed.), Mathematics in the early years, Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics Clements, D. H., & Samara, J.. (2003). Young children and technology: What does the research say? Young Children, 58(6), 34-40. Darling-Hammond, L, Einbender, L., Frelow, F. & Ley-King, J.l (1993) , Authentic Assessment in Practice: A Collection of Portfolios, Performance Tasks, Exhibitions and Documentation Darling-Hammond, L., Ancess, J., & Falk. B. (1995). Authentic assessment in             action: Studies of schools and students at work. New York: Teachers             College Press. Chapter 2,5.  Dewey, J. (1916) Thinking in Education, from Democracy & Education. The Macmillan Company. Duffy, T. M., & Cunningham, D. J. (1996). “Constructivism: Implications for the design and delivery of instruction”. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research on educational communicationsand technology. New York: Scholastic. Ellis, D.K., Ellis, K.A., Huemann, L.J., & Stolarik, E.A. (2007). Improving mathematics skills using differentiated instruction with primary and high school students. An Action Research Project Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the School of Education in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement for the Degree of Master of Arts in Teaching and Leadership Saint Xavier University & Pearson Achievement Solutions, Inc. Chicago, Illinois. Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of Mind: the theory of multiple intelligences. London: Heinemann. Gardner, H. (2006). Multiple intelligences: New horizons. New York, NY: Basic Books. Hargreaves, D.H. (1999) “The Knowledge-Creating School”, British Journal of Educational Studies, Vol 47, No. 2. Jones, N. & O’Shea, J. (2004) “Challenging Hierarchies: The Impact of E-Learning.”, Higher Education, Vol 48. pp. 379-395. Little, J. W. (1982). Norms of collegiality and experimentation: Workplace conditions of school success. American Educational Research Journal. 19(3), 325–340. Lynch-Davis, K. Goodson-Espy, T (2007) Teaching all children mathematics: Preservice elementary teachers perceptions of teaching diverse learners. Conference Papers Psychology of Mathematics & Education of North America, 2007 Annual Meeting, p1-40, 4p McTighe, J., & Brown, J. L. (2005). Differentiated instruction and educational standards: Is detente possible? Theory Into Practice, 44(3), 234-244. Newby, M. (2005) A curriculum for 2020, Journal of education for teaching, November issue, pp297-300. Newmann, F., M, Secada, W.G., & Wehlage, G.G., (1995). A guide to authentic             instruction and assessment: vision, standards and scoring. Madison WI:             Wisconsin Center for education Research. Chapter 5; PP 59-71 New South Wales Institute of Teachers 2004, Professional Teaching Standards Retrieved on June 19, 2011 from http://www.nswteachers.nsw.edu.au/IgnitionSuite/uploads/docs/18pp%2OPTS F%20book%20v6.pdf Pea, R. D. (1993). “Practices of distributed intelligence and designs for education”. In G. Salomon (Ed.), Distributed cognitions: Psychological and educational considerations. New York: Cambridge University Press. Pettig, K. L. (2000). On the road to differentiated. Educational Leadership, 58(1), 14- 18. Saravia-Shore, M. (2008) Diverse teaching strategies for diverse learners, Educating Everybody’s Children: Diverse teaching strategies for diverse learners, rev. and expanded, 2nd ed., Jan. 1, 2008, pp. 41-97 Silver , H. F., Strong, R. W., & Perini, M. J. (2000). So each may learn: Integrating learning styles and multiple intelligences. Retrieved on June 21, 2011 from http://www.ascd.org/cms Trafton, P. (1975) The Curriculum. Mathematics Learning in Early Childhood Education. Reston, VA: The National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. Van Ryneveld, L., (n.d.) “What is constructivism?”, Retrieved on June 22, 2011 from http://hagar.up.ac.za/catts/learner/lindavr/lindapg1.htm Wiggins, G. (1991) “Task” Design Ideas, Principles and Guidelines. Geneseo, NY: Center on Learning, Assessment and School Structure. Read More